Arizona's New/Proposed Gun Laws (Would be awesome to have these in CT too!)

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Arizona's New/Proposed Gun Laws (Would be awesome to have these in CT too!)

Arizona solidified its reputation last year as one of the most liberal gun states in the nation after the Legislature passed a law allowing people to carry concealed weapons without a permit.

This year, gun-rights advocates hope to push Arizona to the top of the list by passing a "Firearms Omnibus" bill that would make Arizona the second state in the nation to require universities and communities to allow guns on campus and one of 10 that permit guns inside public government buildings such as the state Capitol.

The bill to permit guns in public buildings is one of the most comprehensive gun bills proposed so far this session. It also addresses several other issues, including concealed weapons and allowing residents to seize government property if their gun rights aren't observed.

Senate Bill 1201, sponsored by Sen. Ron Gould, R-Lake Havasu City, would do a number of things, including:

- Allow people to carry firearms into all government-run facilities and many public events. The only places or events that could ban firearms would be those that post the correct sign, provide firearm lockers and have armed security and a metal detector. The law would apply to university classrooms, city buses and community festivals that get government permits. It would not apply to K-12 schools.

- Change the wording of last year's concealed-weapons law to require an individual to answer "truthfully" when a law-enforcement officer asks whether the person is carrying a concealed weapon. The current wording requires the person to answer "accurately." Law-enforcement officials say the change could give leeway to a person who, for example, forgets a gun in a bag and inaccurately tells an officer he or she isn't carrying one.

- Change the wording of Shannon's Law to make it a crime to "knowingly" discharge a firearm within city limits. It's currently a crime for someone to discharge a firearm with "criminal negligence." Bill opponents said the change would mean people could be convicted of violating this law only if the prosecution could prove they knew that shooting the gun could result in someone's death or injury.

- Allow people to sue if they feel they were illegally stopped from carrying a firearm into a government facility or event. If a person wins the lawsuit and the government agency doesn't pay within 72 hours, the person has the right to seize as payment "any municipal vehicles used or operated for the benefit of any elected office holder" in the relevant government agency.

"We've been working on doing this for a long, long time," he said. "I don't think anybody at the Citizens Defense League has any objection to disarming in a secure place. None of us has desire to carry in a place that's prohibited. But if you're going to prohibit it, make it secure."

And if a government agency isn't willing to secure the establishment, he said, "don't disarm the victims."

Amen.
This has been a long time gripe of mine. How can you expect me to disarm before entering someplace if you can't stop criminals too? Level the playing field. Only metal detectors will stop me from protecting myself.